www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News The "Petrine Ministry" Revisited

Dear Friends:

I know many of us have been waiting eagerly for this "historic" meeting at the crossroads.

Starting today, May 21st, through the 24th is a joint meeting of renowned Catholic and Orthodox theologians in closed-door sessions. (Unfortunately, the two Russian scholars representing the ROC withdrew at the last minute "in protest" of the Vatican's elevation of the Catholic Apostolic Administrations in Kazakhstan to dioceses.)

This is the latest attempt at putting a handle on Pope John Paul II's exhortation in his "Ut Unum Sint" encyclical for the East to help define, or redefine, the Supreme Pontiff's exercise of the "Petrine Ministry."

Hopefully, we will all benefit from the insights generated by this symposium.

http://www.ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=36188

http://www.ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=36176

AmdG

Dear Amado,

While I know that the office of "Devil's Advocate" has been abolished, I beg your indulgence (no pun intended)to be one here in relation to this meeting.

From the Orthodox point of view, the adaptation of the Petrine Ministry is an important consideration.

But, from the same point of view, the approach taken by Rome is a "Latin" one that is not that of Orthodoxy.

Orthodoxy does not deny the Petrine Ministry primarily because of issues like jurisdiction and papal infallibility.

It originally denied Rome's right to exercise that Ministry because of what Orthodoxy still considers to be the Latin heresies pertaining to Triadology, Mariology and Eschatology in the first instance.

Rome appears not to consider these to be "serious" but they are for Orthodoxy.

The best thing really would be for Rome to discuss how it can be considered "Orthodox" by the Orthodox once again.

I have some ideas how it can, but you know them already.

Alex

Dear Alex:

You said:

Big "O" Orthodox? I thought all along that our being small "o" orthodox Catholic was already sufficient!?

In like manner, if only the Orthodox would re-join the Catholic Church . . .

You should have volunteered to represent the "middle-ground" as a representative of the "Orthodox in communion with Rome!" I did not have a hand in the "selection" of the delegations.

AmdG

Dear Amado,

If you know anyone in Rome, please do put in a good word for me!

I could replace the two Russian delegates - the new RC dioceses in Kazakhstan don't dis me as they do them!

(Where is Kazakhstan anyway? ).

Well, Rome has set up these meetings from the point of view of the Orthodox - or so it says, and this is a definite first for Rome.

So Rome now has to talk about why it isn't big "O" Orthodox since, for the Orthodox, this stands in the way of recognizing the Petrine Ministry of the Pope.

I must say that Orthodoxy does speak from higher ground here.

Rome "added" a number of doctrines that the first millennium knew very little about.

Rome has told the Protestants that they are to return to the faith of old.

It can't really do that with the Orthodox since the latter have the faith of old - a faith once shared completely with Rome.

Alex

Dear All:

While I'm no stranger to some Rome-bashing, I truly sence a bit of humility coming from the Vatican on this one.

As Alex says, Rome can't tell the big-O's to come back to an "older" faith since Rome is a step (or two, or three...) removed from the Seven Ecumenicals itself.

As for the withdrawl of the MP delegates - GOOD! I say let the imperialist church of Moscow become as isolationist as it wants. Frankly, I think the "scholarship" of the conference would have been threatened by the MP's propagandist tendencies anyway.

Yours,

kl

What I understand is that the Orthodox practice and profess the "True Faith" and that Rome has strayed/left. Is that correct Bro Alex ?

James

Dear Brother Jacub,

Niech bedzie pochwalony Jezus Christus!

Yes, that is the Orthodox position.

And it is the position Rome should be talking about before getting into the Roman Primacy.

When Orthodoxy says Rome is in heresy . . . well, I think it is something that should be brought up first in any conference.

Alex

Dear KL,

I think that only time will tell what Rome is up to here.

I don't doubt the Pope's sincerity, but the Vatican keeps making naive assumptions about the Orthodox that blow up in its face - as with the new dioceses in Kazakhstan.

Who is advising the Vatican here? It is proving it knows NOTHING about the Orthodox with such moves.

Imperialist or not, Russian Orthodoxy is THE force to be reckoned with, not the world of Hellenic Orthodoxy.

And Rome has been trying to create bridges to Orthodox Russia for centuries.

Remember, the Ukrainian Catholic Church is but Rome's "poor consolation prize" in the aftermath of the failed Unia of Brest where it was hoped that Russia could be "brought over."

Rome knows that if it cannot bring Russian Orthodoxy to the table history will repeat itself such as when Pope Eugenius remarked at Florence following St Mark of Ephesus' departure, "We have accomplished nothing."

Alex

"The topics that will be discussed are: The biblical foundation of the primate; The primate of the Fathers; The role of the Bishop of Rome in ecumenical councils; recent debates on the primate in relationship to Vatican Council II; recent debates on the primate among Orthodox theologians."

This is interesting. But it would be more promising if it was on the schema of an Ecumenical Council where the Holy Spirit can take the bull by the horns rather than some academic discussion. Is there a failure here to put faith in God's Spirit? Each one of these items should be a Decree with attached canons. If any discussion/debate behind closed doors, let it take place once again at St. Peter's Basilica with all bishops, including Orthodox, having full voting rights. Keep the doors shut until they work it out. The laity are getting sick of this schism thing. We got weddings to plan, darnit!

Our irreconcilable differences shouldn't be a reason to encourage our youth to seek membership in a Protestant community or Islam or just plain nothing.

Joe

Dear Cantor Joseph,

Hopefully, the discussions won't produce more "bull" with respect to pious platitudes about church unity that will fill academic shelves without ever being implemented in praxis.

Alex

Alex,

But it keeps us academic types busy, busy, busy.

More footnotes to pack the papers. :p

The reaction of the Patriarchate of Moscow regarding Kazakhstan in ridiculous, Kasakhstan is no longer part of Russia and is a Muslim country. Then why wouldn't the Catholic Church establish dioceses there, for its faithful, who are mostly Polish and German in their origin, and the few Kazakh converts? The ROC there is the Russian Church, and the Kazakh population are not part of it.

Snoopy:


Yes, it is quite ridiculous.

But, I think, to the MP this is a "logical" extension of their own and somewhat self-serving interpretation of Russian canonical terrritory as extending to former Soviet republics.

There could be some truth to it since, of the 15 million population, about 45% are Orthodox (presumably under the MP?), and only about 1% are Catholics! Even Protestants at 2% outnumber the Catholics by 100%!

The remaining 47% are Muslim.

AmdG

It is become apparent to me that the MP acts out of fear 99% of the time. It is quite obvious from the ecumenical overtures shown by the Catholic Church that she acts out of Christian love and humility more often than not. I don't really pay any mind to the MP. It's unfortunate they control so many Eastern Orthodox.

Logos Teen

Frankly I think that many of you should be ashamed of what you express towards the Russian Church and its Patriarch. The actions taken by Moscow is fully within her rights - as all the Orthodox leaders attested in their support to Russia, most recently with the EP agreeing with +Alexis. What is apparent is that many here harbour much Russophobia towards its Church and leaders and that is frankly not particularly Christian.

Anton